Cyclists in the City of London who run red lights face tougher penalties under new proposals.The City of London Police is exploring whether it can use Community Protection Warnings and Notices to tackle law-breaking cycling. The warnings and notices, civil injunctions which replaced Asbos, could let police issue bigger fines than the £50 fixed penalty notices (FPNs) currently allowed for cycling offences.
It comes after a study found that more than half of London cyclists treated red lights as optional, regularly riding through stop signals despite it being against the law. A 75 per cent jump in the number of people taking to rental e-bikes from the likes of Lime and Forest during a Tube strike this month also prompted claims that London’s streets had become “like Hanoi”.
The latest crackdown by the force is part of new measures to tackle what officials say are “dangerous, antisocial and nuisance cycling behaviours”, the BBC reported.
A paper presented to the City of London Corporation’s Streets and Walkways sub-committee this week said that complaints from the public were mostly about cyclists ingnoring red lights at busy junctions, e-bikes being ridden dangerously, and cycling on pavements and in pedestrianised areas.
‘Cyclists must always stop at red lights’ says TfLwith the launch of a poster campaign encouraging cycling to start obeying the law by stopping at red lights. Londoners will also be shown social media videos as part of the campaign, which follows TfL research that found there was “low awareness and understanding of the rules” on cycling. Out of 1,000 Londoners surveyed, just 16 per cent correctly identified five Highway Code rules on cycling,
As cyclists wend their perceived right of way along the Upper Richmond Road, the Council will no doubt say it is up to the police, and the police will say they do not have the staff to implement existing regulations, especially as they become responsible for Richmond Park.
But what will Richmond Council say in their negotiations with Lime? How about they calibrate their cycles to register the offence if they go though a red light?
Discover more from EastSheenMatters
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I’m really glad that you have put a spotlight on this issue, especially with the rise of rental e-bikes like Lime, which seem to have exacerbated the problem in the area. A similar issue I’d like to see addressed by the council/police/rental companies is cyclists riding on pavements. It’s incredibly frustrating and dangerous for all pedestrians, especially for the elderly, children, and those with disabilities, when cyclists zoom past on the pavements, even more so when it’s an e-bike. I think a zero-tolerance approach and fines for this behaviour are needed to discourage it. Your suggestion to use tech to monitor and fine Lime bike users who run red lights could perhaps be extended to pavement riding?
LikeLike
I couldn’t agree more. I have been banging on about this for years. It is illegal to ride a cycle on the pavement. This was established in the Highway Act 1835 which gave cyclists the right to ride on the roads in return for relinquishing the right to ride on the footway. The Highway Code Rule 64 states ” Cyclists, you must not ride on the pavement “. There is a Fixed Penalty of £30 or £50 (depending on which firm of solicitors is giving the advice) not that it matters because nobody is ever apprehended.
Incidentally, when electric scooters first started to appear the penalty for using a private electric scooter, even on the roads, was impounding the scooter, a £300 fine and six points on any current or future driving licence. Electric scooters are now fairly rare, having been supplanted by electric bicycles, most of which are hired from companies such as Lime, Forest, etc. But, there are private ones, some of which are, in fact, electric motorcycles which do not require any pedalling, but are still being ridden on pavements and shared paths.
Needless to say, E- bikes are much heavier and potentially faster than traditional bicycles.
Richmond, and other local authorities are keen to promote active and sustainable travel such as walking and cycling. However, in practice, these are not always compatible. The Council seem more inclined to facilitate cycling rather than walking and are more concerned with the problem of irresponsible parking of electric bikes than with the irresponsible riding of them.
The parking issue is an inevitable consequence of the business model of the hire companies which is based on the Uber principle.
The Council is aware of the conflict between cyclists and pedestrians on the pavements, but the Chair of the Air Quality and Transport Committee maintains that this is a matter for the Police, which it is. However, the Police say they do not have the resources to deal with this, which they don’t. Consequently, nothing gets done!
All the electric bicycle hire companies have expressed their intention to expand their operations in this country.
Incidentally, you refer to the problem on the Upper Richmond Road. There is a similar (worse) problem on the Lower Richmond Road, particularly at Chalker’s Corner. I continue to be amazed that there have been no serious accidents or fatalities – maybe I will be the first!
Also, electric bikes on pavements are used by thieves to facilitate the snatching of mobile phones .
ROADS ARE FOR CYCLISTS : PAVEMENTS ARE FOR PEDESTRIANS
LikeLike